If you continue to see the third prescription, it means that you are really interested in trading, then let's continue talking.
Before writing a formal article, let me first talk about a question that I am particularly interested in thinking about: why did modern science not appear in modern China? This problem is also known as the Needham problem. By the way, let me talk about the emergence of this Needham problem. Needham is a British scientist and historian who is particularly interested in Chinese history. Then the more he studied Chinese history, the more he admired the Chinese people. China is so awesome, but then a problem arose: since Chinese history has been the best in the world for thousands of years, There has been no gap in Chinese culture for thousands of years, so logically speaking, with the evolution of time and the accumulation of experience, it is only reasonable that the Industrial Revolution should have occurred in China. Why didn't modern science be born in China?
This problem has been discussed by many experts and scholars, and there have been many answers, including the Nobel Prize winner in physics: Yang Zhenning also answered, he said that it was the "Book of Changes" that caused China to not produce modern science.
I personally think that China did not produce modern science because of the traditional Chinese culture, or the way of thinking of the Chinese people is a bit flawed (it is estimated that many Chinese fans will scold), for example, the Chinese believe that the world is made up of the five elements of gold, wood, water, fire, and earth. Yes, all kinds of elements generate and restrain each other. To be honest, the world is made up of gold, wood, water, fire, and earth, which are summed up by Chinese people through long-term observation. This method can be called: large sample observation induction method. But this is clearly flawed: it cannot be falsified. Chinese people’s thinking stops here, and they will not verify, let alone think further. If Chinese people think a little deeper, or continue to verify, they may find that there is a problem with the explanation of gold, wood, water, fire and earth. Yes, maybe we can know that matter is composed of atoms and molecules.
Having said that, I would like to talk about trading by the way: Have you thought about trading and the market in depth? What are the root causes of market volatility? The reason why I oppose relying solely on technical analysis to make orders is that if you only look at the technical aspect, sorry, all you see are appearances like metal, wood, water, fire, and earth, without further thinking about deeper things.
This issue is not discussed in depth, but there is a consensus that there are two things in ancient Greece that led to the birth of modern science in the West: formal logic + positivism. Once humans make good use of this tool, the development of science and technology will change with each passing day, so that everyone can see that after the industrial revolution, the progress of human beings is terrifying. Here is an example: how Western medicine verifies whether a drug is effective, some people should know: large-sample double-blind controlled test. This method is very good. For the same disease, such as sepsis, divide 200 people into 100 each, 100 of them drink lemonade, and the other 100 drink plain water, and do not tell them what they are drinking. Under the comparison test, It can be found that 99% of people who drink lemonade will recover from sepsis, and those who don't drink it will not recover. Even if people don't know the role of VC, they can basically draw a conclusion: drinking lemon water can treat sepsis. As for our Chinese medicine, it has such a long history, thousands of years, and has not been able to overcome many diseases, because we do not have a set of scientific methods to verify its effects. You can say that the level of modern Chinese medicine must be better than that of Hua Tuo in the Three Kingdoms period. high? Western medicine can definitely be said to have made great strides in progress.
Writing here leads to the main point of what I said today: Do we have this method of investment? I think there is. Although investment is difficult, if you know some methods, although you still have to walk, you can avoid many detours.
Advanced trading methods: how to review
Every time a transaction is completed, it is necessary to review and summarize the experience and lessons. I don’t know how you do the review. Here are some methods for your reference.
1. Technical review
I believe that what everyone reviews most is the technical aspect. What do you watch the most in the technical review? Let me give you a suggestion, look more at the "structure" on the technical side, here is an example:
Gold daily chart from January to March 2018
Euro April 2015 daily chart
Do you see the shape of the two pictures above are very similar?
During the rising process, there was a slight correction after a wave of rising, and then a new high, but the new high could not continue to rise, and then the correction, and then the new high was in the correction... After the third time, the market experienced a sharp correction. I myself call it a high-level three-in-a-row push, one bang, then decline, and three exhaustion. After the emergence of this technical form, there is a high probability that the market will need to pull back (it does not mean that it has peaked).
If you sum up this pattern and find that there are many similar cases, next time you encounter this trend, should you consider reducing your position at a high level?
In the past ten years, I have summed up similar structures of this kind, and there are about dozens of them. Of course, some have a high probability of success, while others have a low probability of success. Sometimes what we call "disk sense", in my opinion, is that once the structure in your past experience appears on the technical level, you seem to have seen it before, but you can't remember where you saw it, you think it is a disk sense. And now I try to quantify it as much as possible. This kind of review can significantly improve the level of personal trading. You can try to do some homework.
2. Don’t just do a technical review, the fundamental review is also very important
As I said earlier, it is unreliable and too superficial to only look at the technical aspects. When reviewing the market, you should consider the macro and micro environments at that time. Let me give you an example:
Those who invest in gold and silver now, there is no doubt that the macro environment is the Fed raising interest rates, so have you compared the performance of gold during the Fed's history of raising interest rates? If you have done this simple job, you can at least draw this conclusion:
From the Fed's historical interest rate hike cycle, gold has a high probability of falling before the Fed raises interest rates and rising after raising interest rates.
I came up with this analysis in 2015, so from 2015 till now, I have always insisted on shorting before raising interest rates, and buying up after raising interest rates. Although I don’t make 100% profit every time, but in the judgment of the general direction Nothing goes wrong yet.
If you review more carefully and think more deeply, you can also draw some other conclusions, such as:
How much will gold rebound after raising interest rates? How long will it last? And so on, the deeper and more careful the analysis, the more valuable guidance you will have for your later operations.
What needs to be pointed out here is: the replay actually means that we believe that history will repeat itself, but history will never be 100% replicated, because the background cannot be exactly the same. For example, after Trump came to power, he implemented a tax cut policy. You may I will review the tax cut policy of the Reagan era. If you infer the market performance after Trump’s tax reform policy based on the performance of the financial market after the implementation of Reagan’s tax cut policy, you may stumble. The Reagan era and the Trump era The background is completely different, so there may not be much reference value.
Finally, let me talk about the most common mistake people make when reviewing the market: judging success or failure based on profit and loss. If a trade makes money, you think you did a good job, and if a trade loses, you think you made a mistake. The real review is not like this. A profitable transaction does not mean that you did a good job, and a losing transaction does not mean that you did a wrong one. You have to examine whether your analysis of the market is correct? Is there anything missing? During the operation, are there any problems in opening, adding, closing and position control? What can be improved later on?
Well, that's all for the time being. Writing and typing is exhausting. I hope today's article is of some reference value to you.
Add
